Although its streamlined bit-moving scheme is of little interest to most computer
buyers, Rambus is front and center when next-generation computing architectures are
under discussion. Until recently, it was thought that Rambus would be a big part of
future computers that used Intel microprocessors. Word of trouble with a low-end Intel
chip known as Timna and a series of chip-related license deals have put Rambus in the
news.

Ultimately, various chipmakers and systems makers will decide what types of computer
land on the desktops and in the computer rooms of IT shops everywhere. At the moment,
it appears that Rambus, once seemingly destined for wide use, may be relegated to the
high-end workstation market, leaving the low-end desktop and all-important server
markets to alternative memory architectures.

As most buyers know, CPUs have vaulted ahead in speed, but the memory associated
with those CPUs is often a performance bottleneck. Chip designers foresaw this several
years ago, and began experimenting with memory bus innovations such as Rambus.

Future computers often will have "Intel inside," but whether they use Rambus is not
yet clear. Some observers suggest that Rambus is a good fit where multimedia and
graphics use is intense, but, unless streaming media quickly enters the mainstream,
that support may not be needed right away.

In any case, Rambus is often found in the news these days, usually in a none-too-
favorable light. Generally the company is discussed in terms of suits and
countersuits -- or settlements -- with the big names in the memory chip business. It
has been suggested that the big chip makers bridle as a result of dealings with Rambus,
which is more a high-tech think tank than a traditional chip house. Rambus designs
chips and establishes technology patents, but doesn't fabricate its own designs.

Reports in recent days have cast doubt upon Intel's endorsement of Rambus.

Intel's decision in the mid-1990s to use the Rambus DRAM (R-DRAM) architecture as
the technology of choice for deploying future high-speed designs was a crowning
achievement for Rambus. It highlighted what was until then a foreign method for moving
data on and off fast processors. Rambus was expected to become a common site on the
computer terrain based on its choice by the 300-pound gorilla of desktop computing.

But Intel and others have found Rambus technology difficult and expensive to
implement. Anti-Rambus rumblings grew louder when Intel CEO Craig Barrett told the
Financial Times of London that Intel's decision to go with Rambus memory was a
mistake. Intel officials subsequently said Barrett was referring to Intel's Timna
processor, a Rambus-compatible design aimed at low-end computer systems. Timna was
cancelled before its launch due to problems with a translation hub that would have
allowed the Timna processor to operate with less expensive synchronous DRAM (S-
DRAM).

Intel is publicly committed to keep working with Rambus, albeit solely for high-end
workstation designs.

An Intel spokesman said that Intel decided to drop support for the R-DRAM in its so-
called "value line" of Timna products owing largely to the high costs of the
technology, and will instead use alternative double data rate DRAM (DDR DRAM)
technology.

Intel ran into problems with its Timna project, which had been aiming to create a
low-cost PC by integrating most PC functionality onto a single chip, when the company
tried to add support for S-DRAM. Memory makers and systems houses wanted to use S-DRAM
as an alternative and Intel had created a chip to translate the signal from the chipset
design to R-DRAM mode. But the translation was somewhat flawed, and since Intel
realized that the market would be gone by the time it could correct the problem, the
company decided to terminate Timna. Before the company could get a translation hub chip
to work correctly, it was felt, the market opportunity would have come and gone.

There may be other issues associated with the use of Rambus technology as well.
Kevin Krewell, an analyst with MicroDesign Resources, said, "Rambus does not scale as
easily and you cannot add as many modules on a board. So from that point of view, all
of the OEMs have told Intel that they need to focus on S-DRAM and follow on with the
DDR S-DRAM."

Dean McCarron, an analyst with Mercury Research, does not agree that Rambus is
necessarily better for graphics. He noted that Rambus has miniature caches that can
deliver data more quickly, but the downside is that you may have to access data in big
chunks in order to realize improved performance.

McCarron said the primary difference between DDR DRAM, S-DRAM, and R-DRAM lies in
the electrical interface to the circuit. He notes that the manufacturers assert that
DDR DRAM will be easier to build and has fewer royalty costs, but added, "We are still
early in the market for DDR to determine if that is true."

Said Hemant Dhulla, Intel's marketing director for enterprise chipsets: "One of the
reasons why we are utilizing S-DRAM in the mainstream desktop space is the lower cost
of the platform. As one moves up from midrange workstations, we continue to believe R-
DRAM and dual-memory channel [connecting] chipsets are the better solution.
[Ed. note: DDR-DRAM is a synchronous format. It evolved from the earliest S-DRAM
designs. The terms S-DRAM and DDR-DRAM are sometimes used interchangeably.]

R-DRAM memory incurs a premium; this is an issue in the server market, where using
less expensive memory is more crucial than it is in high-end workstations. Dhulla
admits that DDR-DRAM may be a better play here.

"In the server market, the typical server has a boatload of memory associated with
it. DDR allows computer designers to build up the density of memory. Lower cost and
higher performance can be achieved with interleaved memory subsystems designs," he
said.

In the low-margin mainstream systems business, a royalty charge can upset vendors.
In fact, royalty issues are among the most niggling for Rambus. For big semiconductor
manufacturers, and for board or systems makers further down the food chain, the
obligation to pay royalties on every Rambus-enabled computer shipped has been a
stubborn requirement all along.[Rep.note: Rambus officials were unavailable for
comment.]

The royalty issue does not go away, even if Rambus were to disappear, however.
Rambus holds patents that relate to competitive next-generation architectures such as S-
DRAM and DDR-DRAM, the latter highly touted by Intel competitor AMD. Both of these
technology standards emerged in the wake of Rambus technology, forged by large
semiconductor makers that had grown slow to innovate in their work on memory-exchange
protocols. But Intel's Dhulla suggests that patent portfolios are part and parcel of
the semiconductor world, and those relating to DDR-DRAM will not prove to be
inhibitors.